Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Plan Ahead: Third Circuit Denies Tax Exemption for Asset Sales Made Before Chapter 11 Plan
It has been often said that Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code can be summarized as the “Three Rs,” precisely “reorganize, restructure, and rehabilitate.” In practicality, this includes steps such as “reducing headcount,” (firing people, without the euphemism), streamlining operations, reordering debt, and so on. One of the most critical components of such lifesaving steps is the divestiture of assets, in plain English, selling off assets that are either unprofitable and unwanted burdens or those items that can fetch high prices that can add quickly to the cash reserves of a troubled company.
Thus, asset sales are part and parcel of the typical Chapter 11 and include not only the sale of real estate, but also the sale of other “hard” assets, such as leased or financed equipment and personal property. Sometimes these sales are done as part of the ongoing process of rehabilitating the beleaguered entity, and other times they are accomplished pursuant to a court-approved Chapter 11 plan of reorganization. And therein lies the issue.
Turning to only real estate sales for the moment, the Bankruptcy Code makes clear that the real estate sold under the terms of a Chapter 11 plan is not subject to local transfer taxes. This is a neat money-saving benefit for the debtor and its creditors. But what if the sale is consummated before the plan is itself approved, yet the debtor nevertheless seeks to avail itself of the tax exemption? The answer to that controversial question is of great importance not only to the realty side of business, but has great implications for those in the equipment leasing and financing industry, since their transactions may be likewise affected.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.